Some where, south of the African Equator. . . .

THIS BLOG

The South of the African Equator blog expressed the views and opinions of its author discussing various subjects concerned, mostly, with national affairs. The sentiments expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the views of either his business, family or friends.

The author does not subscribe to the suppression of thoughts, notions, or beliefs, nor keeping silent in the face of apparent injustices, corruption and intolerance perpetrated by the state, business, or individuals.

From time to time the author may offend those who do not agree with his views. Each and everyone offended has the right to express his, her or their side of the issue in the comments section of this blog, which have been left open for this purpose.

Search this Blog

Author: Andrew Field

By Andrew Field – Follow on TwitterI was humoured the other day by the Facebook thought control police (ThinkPol – Orwell in Nineteen Eighty-Four)… I wrote a sentence containing two words, “Muslim” and “kill”, and, no, it wasn’t “kill all Muslims”. I was temporarily suspended for this heinous hate crime. After being wrapped on the wrist, I was re-admitted, but was left wondering just how vulnerable we all seem to be to institutional gagging and pathetic attempts at thought control.

There is little doubt in my mind that we are all now subjected to the whims of official muffling of anything right of centre and just how serious this is. You may not realise it, but it is endemic and the loony left are winning. Dumb think is going global. If you are old, traditional or even a touch nationalist in your approach to life you have to accept that you are simply a thoroughly bad bastard.

On the fringe we are beginning to see mass migrations from poor to wealthy countries, where no immigration control is imposed upon a class of people, because of their colour or criminal religion. We suffer ad infinum the promotion of multi-culturalism to support their integration, which they will not do. It has become criminal to criticise criminal perverts of one particular criminal faith! We are seeing anarchist movements styling themselves as anti-fascist, yet operating violently; much as the fascist Hitler Youth did in years gone by.

Police forces, weakened at the knees, merely look the other way to save grace from potential and politically incorrect action. Yet they are quick to arrest and detain those on mere suggestion of intended right thinking discourse. Even judicial authority suffers the dictate of the thought police, being denied the right to use certain words that may offend. We are seeing well-co-ordinated campaigns of hatred directed at sitting presidents who enjoyed the popular vote. And referendums, the popular vote, are wrong! We are flooded with fake news and all manner of propaganda by both governments and both state and independent media.

We are also observing the shocking phenomenon of the world turning a blind eye to nasty, and often violent, persecution (unless the victims are of colour or a particular criminal, religious sect). We are seeing a swooning of support for horrid dictators who would unleash their nuclear arsenals; non-secular states who deny religious freedom and oppress their minions, especially the women; vile racists who oppress and prejudice white minorities; governments who favour foreigners before their own; and abandonment of their veterans once used. And, you dare not point a finger for fearing ThinkPol will get you!

What a shocking state of affairs. So now we have social media playing the role of discovering and punishing “thoughtcrimes”. It’s a disgrace and an affront to my rights to freedom of expression, an invasion of my privacy through the apparently poor use of criminal psychology and omnipresent surveillance, interpretation of thought based on few selected key words, and dodgy algorithms, yet a denial of my rights to face my accusers, when caught. Clearly Facebook has succumbed – its clients can no longer express their opinion without sanction or penalty for wrongful accusation, unless they toe the liberal or leftist line.

We need to understand, as we do of course, that freedom of speech is not absolute and does not cross the bounds of defamation, obscenity, or porn. Nor should one be seditious or incite others to violent resistance, yet social media abounds with revenge hate crime and I need not point to either colour or creed to say who gets away with it. This is the global hypocrisy we suffer today, but I shall not be muzzled by Facebook. Hell no, there are plenty of ways to skin the cat, and they know it.

By Andrew Field – Follow on TwitterOh dear, oh dear… so we are not to have an Ndebele King and there shall be no coronation after all… There we were, all getting ready for this magnanimous event, dusting off the cow hide shields and sharpening and polishing our assegais. Goodness, we were even refreshing our favourite war dance steps, and songs, Mushongoyo, Isitshikitsha, Amabhiza and Ingquza, when someone goes and declares the coronation unconstitutional. I mean what a party pooper.

Before the ruling, July Moyo, Minister of Local Government et al, simply could not handle this hot potato, typically declaring an indaba (meeting) of traditional leaders sub judice and awaiting the outcome of the Court. Seems to many, that the President of the Chief’s Council, Fortune Charumbira, may not have been comfortable with the concept of a traditional king slotting into a higher position than himself. Like all threatened filthy politicians, for that is the best way to label them, he too deferred to the Court. Besides they didn’t want to be seen to be usurping King Emmerson in any way.

Now here is the irony… Zimbabwe’s Constitution states unreservedly that there is a place for traditional leaders, dedicating an entire chapter to this. Its purpose is to uphold traditional values, administer and protect the environment… honourable tasks. What could be more traditional then, than an Ndebele or, for that matter, a Shona King? If truth be known, traditional Kings would dominate the Chiefs, and the politicians will not be wanting any of that!

The Constitution does not refer to Kings, yet both the great Shona and Ndebele cultures evolved from tangible Kingdoms stretching back to Mapungubwe and the Mutapa. Of course you may understand the fear of today’s spineless politicians being appropriated by any king, because our culture does not understand titular position without absolute authority, but then Robert was king and no man should have set him asunder from the throne (well, until the coup, that is).

In fact there is an Act of Parliament styled the Traditional Leaders Act, promulgated in 1998. Sensibly, like most legislation, it hung onto the structure and administration that had been nurtured and refined by the Rhodesians, on the backs of our colonial heritage. Back then of course, the District Commissioner was king and the Chiefs were very much on the RF political pedestal!

So too in modern Zimbabwe the District Administrator is king, or rather the not quite so important chef, between tending to their businesses and doing what the party demands of them, mostly kowtowing to the one who thought he was king! Of course Zimbabweans have always done it better in buttering up to or patronising their chiefs… they are all recipients of the latest and greatest 4×4 vehicles and other gratuitous gifts specifically to curry political favour. Patronage in one word, which ultimate sees to the demise of democracy.

Thus, the concept of a kingdom and traditional kings seems a little too much for weak minded, mealie mouthed politicians to cope with. Yet, it is they who harp on ad infinitum about maintaining traditional Zimbabwean values and goodness knows they are quick to remind us how colonialism came along and messed it all up. Now here we have an instance of the Khumalo clan or dynasty attempting to resurrect their traditional leadership and everybody is, seemingly, ducking for cover. It would seem this is a hot potato which will not be cooling any time soon. Put your spears and assegais back in the cabinet.

By Andrew Field – Follow on Twitter
Social media users are becoming stale at creating new and interesting own-content, thus allowing the networks to be hijacked by partisan politics, extremist religion, and to a lesser degree causes, anti-phobias and conspiracies. It is a hot pot of grumpiness.

Recent surveys suggested that “more than one-third of social media users are worn out by the amount of political content they encounter”. And, individually, you really are not contributing to the groundswell of content or discontent with fresh ideas. Same old, same old.

Both Facebook and Twitter are being populated with so much unoriginal content that they have become the premier platform for re-messaging (sharing/re-tweeting) partisan interests. The volume of conflicting ideas and philosophies in single medium has never been surpassed. Stop the internet, I just want to get off… enough, I just don’t care what you think, really!

Social media users are suffering information overload, and often this excess is of material they do not wish to deal with. The Pew Research Center suggests that “more than half (of users) describe their online interactions with those they disagree with politically as stressful and frustrating”. People with causes are using brutal force feed tactics to deliver their messages, often with horrific, gory images.

Content is stressful indeed. Those users let loose on social media who do create original content seem to pursue very blinkered views. They will not entertain contrary thoughts that may be different, unconventional, or even from a new perspective. Dogmatic content sometimes reflects, sometimes poorly, on the user’s general upbringing, philosophies and shaping.

To cap this, there is an awful lot of anger out there in social media. Clearly, this is an angry little world and so too is the content of social media. It is nasty. The tone of content is often disrespectful, condescending and, frankly, troubling. This anger is a reflection of the broader climate in our societies today. Who foments this anger and what is the end objective?

Add to this spurious, fake news. Social media users have a penchant for fake news distribution. They just cannot help themselves. Few take time to check and verify. Gullibility is at its peak. The more outrageous the better, and why not one might ask?

Governments and the mainstream media have been the masters of fake news for years. We used to call it propaganda. But today’s fake new is sensational, good reading for the bored masses and angry people. They are being fed, and we are all being manipulated.

Governments, in their infinite wisdom (takes tongue out of cheek), busy themselves with anti-hate laws in the hope that the problem will subside. It will not go away. Racism was never properly suppressed, its use moved simply from one hue to the other. It’s a cause that will not die. Nor will religious extremism.

Populations have aversions to those who are different and do not conform to custom. Social media provides a ready platform to offer discontent and multiplies the issues when legislated against. Germany’s proposal to fine social media companies for failing to remove illegal content “is a significant moment in democracy’s battle with digital giants”, according to some!

Social media moguls are extending the science of social media with artificial intelligence. Google has launched a new AI program called Perspective to detect “abusive” comments and hatred online. Facebook recently admitted “it has become clear that our systems to identify and remove hate speech have failed to work as effectively as we would like”.

With both government and social media controls creeping in, users are actually seeing little relief. In fact the problem is getting worse, and the majority of users now try harder to avoid political and religious argument on social media.

Often, when avoidance fails, users take steps to filter or curate their feeds, frequently then eliminating the good material too! When the State takes a role in the media, the news is always biased, but boycott often leaves one without useful information.

The solution may lie very much in your choice of contacts and friends in social media. The average user is actually carrying too many contacts. Once it was vogue to have as many as you could muster, but alas, that is biting back.

Some interesting statistics suggest that two-thirds of your Facebook friends are generally known to you personally, while Twitter is almost the reverse. Yet of your contacts, only about a quarter have similar views to you, less than 6% opposing views about politics and the rest have mixed or neutral opinions. Selective pruning of your contacts may well be necessary. But do you want to stick your head in the sand?

Unless you can achieve some peace of mind in social media, angry information overload will wear you down. One would think that if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen, yet social media, especially Facebook, membership continues to climb. Clearly humanity needs its little dose of anger, its gripes, whinges and whines. We are being overwhelmed, it may be time for some to pull the plug on this social monster.

By Andrew Field – Follow on Twitter
Every terrorist incident in the West seems to have a sequel, and that is the blame game. In a poll on Twitter by David Jones 70% of respondents suggest government was partly to blame for the attack. Even the music concert performer, Ariana Grande, who sung at the Manchester event is being blamed for the clothes that she wore. Then it’s the security services for not preventing the attack.

Of course, it goes without saying that an entire religion is also to blame. Loose immigration policy on Middle Eastern and North African refugees, and the infiltration of radicalism into mosques is apparently much to blame. Even liberal thinking people took a knock and so too does every strain of political party. On the other hand, singer, Morrissey suggests that politicians are just too scared to blame Islam for Manchester attack! It doesn’t help.

Indeed, how is all this indignant blame going to help? It is certainly throwing up a smoke signal and one wonders if our political ‘elite’ can see the smoke for the mist and formulate pro-active and acceptable policy.

I am told that two poor homeless people, Britons, who were begging and sleeping on the street in the immediate area of the blast, rushed to the aid the bleeding victims. Their moving accounts of how they helped the victims has ended in an appropriate appeal to assist them and the money is still pouring in!

Here are two British people made destitute by the system, struggling to keep going, against all the odds, and their Government does naught for them, so it seems. How could they? Here is the irony. So much funding available to the poor is allocated to refugee immigrants first; they are housed, given jobs and lead a right royal life in comparison to life in their home nations.

Our ungrateful terrorist, even enjoyed a university education until he dropped out. Who funded that? Police named British born Salman Ramadan Abedi, a Muslim, just 22 years of age, from a Libyan refugee background. His brother, Ismail Abedi, was arrested and so too were his parents, in Libya.

Salman and Ismail appear to be of good home and blessed with the opportunities of the British way of life. Abedi lived in a house on Manchester’s Elsmore Road – a quiet, residential street lined with red-brick semi-detached houses. How quaint. Better than a cardboard box outside a stadium. The brothers were more favoured by the system, it would seem, than are most true Britons who find themselves in dire straits.

So who is responsible for this, who should take the blame? Seems to me that there is blood on the hands of successive Western governments. European and American intervention in the Muslim non-secular states is part of the problem. Invasions on false premises of weapons of mass destruction and, of course, the war against terrorism. All with ulterior motive. Offensives against ISIS in the ‘Caliphate’, and more recently in Syria cannot help. But it is not the entire cause.

Islam cannot possibly be described as a religion of peace. By all accounts it is clearly the root of most terrorism in Europe and is based on its tenets of non-Muslim intolerance, jihadist revolution, hatred of the infidel and the anti-Semitism of its faith. It’s a hateful religion, so much so that some are influenced to perpetrate dastardly acts of terrorism in its name.

There are a disturbing number of psychotically deluded little Muslims running around Europe. This psychosis is the ultimate motive for all Islamic terrorism in the West. Yet the West digs its head deeper into the sand. The migration to Europe by many thousands of Muslims, away from their now broken homes and bankrupt economies run by despots, is not without contribution. They come with much religious indoctrination, a pathological bitterness, and even thoughts of retribution and, yes, the blame game too.

We owe them, some might say, and we are giving abundantly it would seem. Yet the system that feeds and sustains them is foreign to them, non-Islamic, and needs to conform to their way of living. They, and more so their issue, are easy victims for radicalisation; that process of religious corruption of the mind and making the infidel host enemy. Their new home, with generous benefactors, becomes the target. No holds barred. They perceive they are profiled badly, which they are much due to Muslim terrorism, and they feel rejected.

So there is the ugly mix. The West seems to have ignored the alarm bells rung and buries itself in the comfort of being nice to these strange and struggling people with different ways. Society is intolerant of those who point fingers at migration or object to the pacifism in the face of an onslaught, labelling them racist or even bigot. And now the fires are burning. Manchester weeps. Terrorism wins yet again – Europe raises the white flag to negotiate!

The thing is, you cannot negotiate with terrorists. Negotiation with terrorists will only succeed if you bend entirely to their demands. They call the shots. The jihadist wants to impose his religion, his way of life, the Islamic way, and give privilege to Muslims and those of the faith. There is no compromise. Understand clearly, the jihadist has no political master nor tangible nation to which they are loyal. They fight and slaughter the innocents in the name of their mythical God. Gods cannot negotiate. So who are European government to negotiate with?

The Manchester suicide bombing is a dire tragedy of multiple proportions. The dead and their grieving and suffering families, the lacerated and torn wounded, and the horrified onlookers scared with fear, are only a part of the tragedy. The other tragedy is that of successive governments which, clearly, cannot see the wood for the trees.

The time is ripe for a paradigm shift in combatting Muslim terrorism. It goes much beyond tackling home grown radicalisation. Europeans need to go to the root of the problem and exorcise or purge the community which breeds the problem. This, of course goes against those well entrenched doctrines of human rights, religious freedom of association, and the credible system of jurisprudence that Europeans enjoy, but which no immigrant Muslim would have enjoyed in his home country. There is the dichotomy.

By Andrew Field – Follow on TwitterYou have all heard that saying about the elephant in the room… it’s a metaphorical idiom for an obvious truth which goes unaddressed. It’s a risk that nobody wants to discuss. Our elephant in the room is as real as it will ever get, yet everyone is sticking their heads in the sand, to excuse another idiom. In the news this week is the story that a recent three year survey has “revealed a dramatic 30 percent decline in savannah elephant populations.” i

African lion populations have been declining rapidly too. Some say that 75 percent of the lions have been wiped out in the last 50 years. The world lion population is estimated at between 25 and 30 thousand… that is barely more than twice the number of athletes at the Games of the XXXI Olympiad. By the next games, Olympians may well outnumber lions in Africa.

One doesn’t have to search too hard for information to establish the dramatic decline in the now critically endangered rhinoceros populations, the now vulnerable lions, not to mention Grizzly Bear, the Polar Bear and the Great White Shark. These species are still being hunted. You would have thought man would be smart enough to realise his destruction of our environment. But no, we are told this is conservation.

The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) lists 18 species as critically endangered. Nearly half of those species are African! A further 30 species are simply endangered, with African Wild Dog topping the list and a few other African species being prominent. ii One might begin to point fingers towards incompetent governance, corruption, land encroachment and poaching. They are all rife in Africa. We might well cry loud about the insatiable Asian demand for animal parts too. We know the hunters will also rush to defend their patch.

Take as an example the case of the rhinoceros, killed for the horny growth on their forehead to make dagger handles and used supposedly as an Eastern medical remedy. Zimbabwe’s wildlife parks have succumbed almost entirely to being poached out. There are an estimated 800 rhinoceros left in Zimbabwe almost all of which are in privately owned parks in the hands of rhino conservationists, but even those are under attack, often with filthy politicians being complicit! Twice the number of rhinoceros were poached in 2015 compared with the previous year!

National Parks and Wildlife Management in Zimbabwe recently ventured into dehorning rhinoceros in what is described as a desperate attempt to stop poaching. One wonders what will happen to the horn? Will they destroy it or will it be whittled off to some Chinese trader to enrich some politician or bureaucrat? Why have National Parks not destroyed the huge stock of ivory in their possession? Who has his eye on future enrichment?

The point is, we are awash with information on the problem, yet nobody with the power at their disposal has the courage to stand firm on real conservation of African species. The solutions can only lie in Africa. Yes we have a whole army of tree huggers, conservationists, and animal lovers barking at the world, but nothing they do will reverse the trend. Indeed it is like one man trying to push over an African Mahogany tree; with his head.

Governments need to prioritise actions to reduce the destruction of our African heritage. We as wildlife enthusiasts need to boot them in the right direction. Organised Wildlife needs to speak out and become more prominent and active in this fight. Sadly, if they don’t and during my lifetime, the rhino population will have dwindled to naught, lions will have gone too and the elephants will perhaps survive me on the critically endangered list. What great African wildlife heritage we are leaving to our grandchildren!

By Neelix at English Wikipedia (Own work) [Public domain], via Wikimedia CommonsBy Andrew Field – Follow on TwitterJust a few years ago, about three in fact, Zimbabweans voted old fashioned nationalist notions and philosophies back into power… some say they stole the election, but no one really contested that. So one might only assume they achieved a fair majority. In fact, Zimbabweans have been a little like the proverbial sheep in not resisting the tyranny of autocracy and stale liberation demagoguery. The ZANU(PF) regime continued with its merry looting and oppression against all legitimate opposition. Where has the money gone? Today we are faced with the expected consequences of allowing that regime to remain in power. An economy spiralling out of control and a cash crunch of such significant proportions it has brought us to our knees.

This is not the fault of the British or the Americans… nor the white man, or colonialism… No, this is the entire the fault of a clearly incompetent regime more fully occupied with personal self-enrichment and empire building than caring for the people. Let us be blunt, the party should have been democratically deposed 15 to 20 years ago, but Zimbabweans, seemingly, did not have the courage to do so or certainly failed in their foresight. No credible opposition has been formed. The ruling party’s leader is worshipped like a God, he has the following of rural populations, a major religious cult with a powerful support, and remains solidly entrenched. Zimbabweans, it would seem, your impending fate is one of doom and gloom. Yet, aside from the whinging and whining, seemingly little is being done. Well not entirely…

During the earlier part of May, 2016 a lone pastor, Evan Mawirire launched his sole campaign, appropriately hash tagged in social media as #ThisFlag. A small modicum of hope, this little trickle of resistance may not have the impact it deserves immediately, because those who dare dabble in the social media movement are just too timid to speak out. However, people are slowly beginning to lend it support, and why shouldn’t they? ZANU(PF) hi-jacked the flag when they assumed ownership of the country. Now the pastor wants to hi-jack the flag back and give it to the people, to the citizens who actually own the flag. It’s metaphorical in concept but wonderfully healthy protest, to be encouraged and supported. It will be interesting in the days ahead to see if Zimbabweans take back their flag.

Would it be unfair to suggest then that Zimbabweans have become the international laughing stock? Their currency did, and now they want to try printing money again! Perhaps, but one might candidly suggest there is not a whole lot of respect for a people who lost their national pride (and their flag) to the party and remain subjugated by its almost subservient bonds, many times worse than their colonial heritage. History is going to judge very harshly indeed the last two voting generations of Zimbabweans in the scheme of things; if they do not rise to the challenge. They have at their disposal a clear, non-violent, non-political form of protest which if given sufficient support may see a few tails turned. But let us not forget the courage and tenacity of another sole campaigner, Itai Dzamara. Don’t sell Mawarire down the same trickle of pathetic support. Each wave of your flag is asking “where is Itai?”

There was a huge flash of whimpering, egalitarian, liberal sentiment following Donald Trump’s infamous little quip about barring Muslims entry into the United States. The bigot, how dare he! Sure, to any sensible thinking person, it was a ludicrous thing to say, especially on the campaign trail, he being obviously expectant of the peoples support. It is all rather farcical only because Trump, well knowingly, uttered his thoughts in the ferment of a rather too liberal society. His words were intended to shock, if not wake up a blinkered, apparently big-hearted, electorate. As the old cliché suggests, they truly do walk among us.

The indignant outrage of Western society is a touch preposterous, perhaps more so than the very pronouncement by our prime, all American, presidential hopeful clown. It has stimulated division within his own ranks and most certainly the extremes of society; it has created victims in the Western Muslim community further exacerbating the ‘dangers’ of living in a free, decadent society, and thus creating a cause; and, heaven forbid, it has been truly rough abrasion for simply nice people who cannot see the wood for the trees.

Perhaps we need to reflect on Trump’s words and the reaction to them a little more carefully. What we are seeing here is egalitarian liberalism forcing the suppression of freedoms, rather than advocating them. We may not like what Trump had to say, but he had the right to say it. One does protest a little too much. Thus, those rights and freedoms espoused are, perhaps, the very same liberties that allow others to do Western society harm. The fact is, Islamic terrorism, through its many variants is well intent on doing harm in Western Judeo/Christian society.

There are many taboos in Western society in the interests of political correctness. The late Christopher Hitchens once wrote about unwelcome attention received in response to essays written ‘defending the right of Holocaust deniers and Nazi sympathizers to publish their views’. He averred,

“I did this because I think a right is a right and also because if this right is denied to one faction, it will not stop there.”

How right he was. Laws criminalising Holocaust denial are already being extended to the criticism of Islamist sentiment, clearly the single biggest threat to Western society today. Laws prohibiting so called hate crime, or the motivation of racial, sexual or other prejudices, involving violence, are blossoming in Western society. They deny our right to free speech, we cannot offer vitriol and contempt to our worst enemy. Yet our enemy is at liberty to offer his! How soon will it be an offence to condemn mass immigration?

For Islamists, to achieve their objectives, it is inherent that they should subvert and deploy people of their ilk, religion and culture, in other words, those select, unwitting Muslims who have integrated into Western societies. Yes, it is a broad sweeping brush, but it will be those from this community who wish to destroy or more rather have infidel Western society succumb to their religious zeal. Islamists, seemingly, have the right to hate and destroy, while Western society has its hands tied through ignorance and passivity. One might begin to understand Trump’s clear frustration, albeit the man is a fool.

Liberalism is about freedoms and rights, which makes it all the more astonishing why liberal minded people have denied Trump the right to his freedom of speech; the right to dislike a certain sector of the community who pose a threat to their well-being. Dislike, and indeed distrust, is not hatred. How can anybody like and trust those who seek to destroy our cultural and religious values? People cannot expect to uphold the rights of those who would destroy them, while suppressing the rights of those who believe their ideas and policies may prevent such destruction. It is a grey line, much like hate crime, but Western society needs to get is head out of the sand!

And for those still blurting their anti-Trump vitriol, of course you have the right to do so, but take note: Muslims do not have a right to visit the United States, nor migrate to Europe. It is actually a very liberal privilege.